Intel's Conroe 2.66GHz beats an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz!

crazyswede · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:27

Of course the benchmarks where controlled by Intel, but it does look hopeful. However, it is still 6 months before it is released and then we will see how AMD's new stuff performs. Then I will make up my mind about which way to go for my new system if I can last that long

Intel is very excited about their new Core architecture, especially with Conroe on the desktop. It's not really news to anyone that Intel hasn't had the desktop performance crown for years now; their Pentium 4 and Pentium D processors run hotter and offer competitive or lower performance than their AMD competitors. With Conroe, Intel hopes to change all of that.

Intel setup two identical systems: in one corner, an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz running on a DFI RD480 motherboard. And in the other corner, a Conroe running at 2.66GHz on an Intel 975X motherboard.

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713

What do you think?

Jokester · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:30

Beats it? By the looks of things it kicks its head in and leaves it for dead.

Would be interesting to know the cost of that chip and also, was it at stock or overclocked?

Jokester

Spit · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:33

Reckons its stock and the extreme edition will be clocked at 3GHz!!! :eek:

Jamie1984 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:37

one could expect tomorrows (6months!) technology to beat todays, so I'd rather see a comparison when the chip is out. nice to see intel putting in some effort tho

benjo plz. · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:39

Meh, I think the fact it has four cores has something to do with it.

Edit: Oh ******** thats cloverton :\

m3csl2004 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:40

cant wait

literally - ill be going 775 in about a month lol

marc2003 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:40

sweet

crazyswede · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:40

Yeah... its nice to see that they are making an effort.

I am really interested to see what AMD will do.

Does it have 4MB cache?

monkeypants · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:42

Jokester said:
Would be interesting to know the cost of that chip and also, was it at stock or overclocked?

Conroe was stock, pricing for that CPU is $529, but the 2.4Ghz model is $315. Both have 4mb L2 cache. I think it's fairly obvious that the E6600 (2.4Ghz) one is much better value especially as they'll overclock mentally as well.

Squidge · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:47

Call me what you like, but I think I'll be waiting for some non-Intel benchmarks before breaking out the plastic

First results do look go though. Glad to see them dropping the speed and improving performance at long last instead of constantly trying to get more and more ghz.

Indy500 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:49

I'd like to see some indepedent benchmarks before I say Intel finally has a decent desktop processor.

m3csl2004 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:51

there was - fear was the same benchmark that anand use

"1) It's the only gaming benchmark that we're using that doesn't use an Intel provided demo. This is the same demo we use in our tests."

AWPC · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:52

Think the extreme edition is scheduled to be 3.33Ghz + 1333FSB. Should be good as in the next few months expect more performance to come before they finalise the design.

The FEAR max frame rate benchmark is the most impressive as it is a good 60% more which for that game is huge when you consider how hardware hungry it is.

Word of warning to anyone thinking of upgrading to a 775 platform soon. Wait until they finalise the conroe mobo specs as even though the 975X is supposed to be fully conroe compatible the 955X was supposed to be fully compatible with presler EE chips but VT is not supported.

Its good that Intel have finally got it right but @ the same time with all their resources surprised they have taken so long to do so. Cannot see AMD closing the gap to conroe anytime soon either as they lack Intels R&D resource + Intel still have their 8 core CPU in the pipeline.

m3csl2004 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:55

yeah im aware no current chipset supports it, there will be a new revision of 975x that supports it at a later date

im just going 805 + some cheap ddr2/pci-e board, then i can splash out when im flusher on a proper supported board

Toothpick · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:57

What about the memory?
Its running 267 mhz faster on the intel chip, how would (or how will am2) amd run with the same mem speed?

AWPC · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:58

m3csl2004 said:
yeah im aware no current chipset supports it, there will be a new revision of 975x that supports it at a later date

im just going 805 + some cheap ddr2/pci-e board, then i can splash out when im flusher on a proper supported board

Try to get @ least DDR667 Ram that way you can just plug it straight into the conroe mobo. One less upgrade to buy.

Indy500 · 7 Mar 2006 at 21:59

m3csl2004 said:
there was - fear was the same benchmark that anand use

"1) It's the only gaming benchmark that we're using that doesn't use an Intel provided demo. This is the same demo we use in our tests."

Both cpus managed over 60fps minimum anyway, wouldnt notice the difference.

Jokester · 7 Mar 2006 at 22:00

Toothpick said:
What about the memory?
Its running 267 mhz faster on the intel chip, how would (or how will am2) amd run with the same mem speed?

Looser timings, there's not much difference at the moment between DDR and DDRII performance.

Jokester

m3csl2004 · 7 Mar 2006 at 22:06

more stressful game will be released by the time conroe becomes easily available

AWPC · 7 Mar 2006 at 22:32

Just read somewhere that the 1st Conroe CPU currently scheduled to be released is gonna be the Extreme Edition 3.33 Ghz + 1333FSB!